Presence

Last night, TA held an informational meeting for parents of children going into second grade on the Zilberman method.  Due to circumstances beyond my control, I was unable to attend, so when I got home last night, I did a little online research to see what I could learn.  There isn't much online (an inquiry on LOOKJED along with a few responses is pretty much the only formal discussions I found), so I thought I'd do my best to summarize what I know, and hopefully folks can chime in to give a more complete picture.

For those unfamiliar with the Zilberman method, it was started about 20 years ago by R. Yitzchok Shlomo Zilberman, who founded a school in the Old City that took an approach to Torah learning based on the Mishneh in Pirkei Avos (age five for Torah, ten for Mishneh, fifteen for Talmud); in the past, this approach has been championed by the Maharal and the Gra, but not widely adopted.  The Zilberman approach reportedly gained popularity in Israel, and recently (within the past five years, I believe) was instituted in a number of schools in Lakewood.  TA's R. Leventhal went to Israel a few years ago to learn the Zilberman method, and began teaching a single class at TA in the style; after making aliyah last year, R. Pollack received instruction in the method and continues in R. Leventhal's place.

The Zilberman method, based on Pirkei Avos, focuses on Chumash for younger boys, but the method is applied as well to Mishneh and Gemara.  The method focuses on laining the Chumash with the ta'amei ha'mikra (tropp), and includes repitition so as to familiarize the student with the text as much as possible.  Basically, the class will take a section of Chumash, learn to lain it with the tropp, and repeat it several times in order to commit it to memory (I do not know if, in American schools, this includes translation).  This is in contradistinction to the traditional approach, which does not focus as much on memorization, but in understanding the story, words and explanation of the text (usually based on Rashi).  Besides familiarity and memorization of the text, the Zilberman approach touts many other benefits as well (R. Kahane sent a letter explaining these, but there was little substantive information other than vague platitudes to the quasi-supernatural inherenet knowledge of the method's proponents).

TA's current approach is to start a Zilberman method class in second grade, continuing through the rest of elementary school; I do not know if they take the Zilberman approach beyond Chumash, or, if once Chumash is completed, they begin a traditional Mishneh/Talmud curriculum (I don't know for sure, but I am guessing the Nach portion is skipped over in American schools).  The goal here, I believe, is to provide the student with knowledge and familiarty with verses quoted in the Mishneh/Talmud, saving them the need to open a Chumash and learn the relavent text while learning a sugya.

That's about as much information as I have; my intial reactions to hearing about this method a year or so ago was that, for American students, this approach does not make sense.  For Israeli boys, fluent in Hebrew, a simple laining of the Chumash may be enough to convey the plain meaning of the text; in America, where Hebrew is mostly unlearned in a linguistic fashion, it would seem that while the students absorbed the text in a superficial fashion, there would be no real understanding, and certainly no critical understanding.  What would result is a familiarty with the text, making it easier to incorporate into later gemara learning.

Recently, however, my opinion changed.  My son is in R. Pollack's first grade class at TA; for Parshas Noach, R. Pollack has been teaching them both the traditional and Zilberman method (I don't know this for a fact, all I know is that Ezra has been wanting to lain his Chumash instead of reading and translating; he does, however, still know the translation, which leads me to believe that R. Pollack is teaching both methods).  I have to say, I am very impressed with Ezra's knowledge; he is able to lain the psukim covered in class, and has shown interest in laining other parts of Chumash that he has yet to learn (he enjoys reading with the tropp).  I really don't have enough information to make a conclusive decision as to whether or not I would want him taking this approach fully, but I am much more inclined after this than before.  In addition, comments I have heard from parents with older students have been positive.

I am interested in finding out if there are any professional/academic assessments of this approach (beyond what assorted "gedolim" say), and if the Zilberman method has any correlations in other educational approaches.  There is little information online (a Yahoo Search for "zilberman method" should turn up the few pages out there, mostly schools advertising their programs or newsgroup threads), hopefully we can get some good discussion in the comments, maybe even from some people who went last night, or have children in the program at TA.

Update: I did find references to the "Barkai system," which, based on this paper entitled, "An Analysis of the Implementation of The Barkai Method in the Orot Etzion School System," by Steven Esses, sounds similar to the Zilberman method.